09TBILISI1289, GEORGIA: PATRIARCH DISCUSSES CHURCH DELEGATION TO

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cablesIf you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol).Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #09TBILISI1289.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TBILISI 001289
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/09/2019
TAGS: PGOVPHUMPRELKIRFRUGG
SUBJECT: GEORGIA: PATRIARCH DISCUSSES CHURCH DELEGATION TO
MOSCOW
Classified By: AMBASSADOR JOHN F. TEFFT. REASONS: 1.4 (B) AND (D).
¶1. (C) Summary: The Patriarch of the Georgian Orthodox
Church (GOC), Ilia II discussed relations between Russia and
Georgia, including relations between the Russian Orthodox
Church (ROC) and GOC over dinner with the Ambassador on July
¶7. Former Georgian Ambassador to Moscow Zurab Abashidze and
Bishop Gerasime (Head of GOC's Foreign Relations) briefed the
Ambassador on their recent trip to Moscow, including meetings
with ROC Patriarch Kirill and Russian DFM Karasin. All were
generally pleased with the results of the trip but harbored
no illusions as to the long road ahead to normalize relations
and restore Georgia's territorial integrity. End Summary.
¶2. (C) Comment: The church-led delegation to Moscow, which
was undoubtedly approved by the GoG, appears to have made
some progress in opening a semi-official back channel. The
trip highlights the critical role the GOC plays in Georgian
politics and foreign relations. Ilia II was in good spirits
though his health appears to be worsening. Symptoms of
Parkinson's disease were apparent and clearly concerned his
entourage. The Patriarch is scheduled to fly to Germany for
the third time in the past two years for "recovery" in the
near future. End Comment.
Kirill Cordial, Constructive - Karasin Less So
¶3. (C) Abashidze and Gerasime said their discussions with
Patriarch Kirill were productive. Gerasime and Abashidze
explained to Kirill that no Georgian leader could ever
tolerate the dismemberment of Georgia. Kirill acknowledged
this fact and agreed that the GOC had sole ecumenical
jurisdiction over both South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Kirill
also agreed upon the need to protect GOC property and sites
in both the occupied territories. Kirill stressed the need
for cooperation and stated that ROC-GOC relations should not
be held hostage to political events. Kirill agreed that a
meeting between Patriarchs, possibly to commemorate/celebrate
the opening of the Zemo Larsi-Kazbegi checkpoint on the
Georgian/Russian border, was a good idea. Kirill suggested
the meeting culd take place in Vladikavkaz, Kazbegi or both.
As a further sign of good intentions in trying to mend ties
between Orthodox communities, the ROC will receive a group of
Georgian pilgrims in Nizhni Novgorod who will arrive by
direct charter from Tbilisi.
¶4. (C) According to Abashidze and Gerasime, the meeting
with DFM Karasin was less productive. Karasin bristled at
the suggestion from Abashidze and Gerasime that Swiss
representatives should be present to provide a neutral third
party observer during meetings between Russian and Georgian
officials. This was discussed specifically in the context of
negotiation necessary to reopen the Larsi checkpoint.
Karasin said that any discussion must be in bilateral or in
existing multilateral formats, despite lack of diplomatic
relations between Georgia and Russia. Karasin said that the
Geneva talks were productive but decried what he described as
the harsh, personal tone of many of the meetings. Karasin
stated that the format and talks should continue. Karasin
suggested the possibility of re-establishing formal
diplomatic relations, a proposal rejected by both Abashidze
and Gerasime as impossible as long as Russia insisted on
having three embassies in Georgia.
Patriarch Opines
¶5. (C) The Patriarch appeared pleased with the results of
Qthe delegation's visit and noted that the process of
reconciliation would be long. The Patriarch praised U.S.
efforts to engage Russia but noted that "it is impossible to
change Putin". The Patriarch stated that Russian foreign
policy was short-sighted and focused only on the near term.
He said he thought Russian recognition of Abkhazia and South
Ossetia would only create problems in the North Caucasus and
that Russia's desire to control the "near-abroad" worsened
its own internal problems. The Patriarch said that Russian
policy only hurt Russian interests though acknowledged that
the Caucasus were a painful and sensitive issue for Russians.
Despite the difficulties, the Patriarch expressed some hope
that President Medvedev would pursue a different course than
Putin. The Patriarch recalled that before meeting Medvedev
after the funeral of former Patriarch Alexei II, he was given
a hard line text of talking points that Medvedev was supposed
to follow during their meeting. Instead, Medvedev departed
from the text and was warm, understanding and engaging. The
Patriarch said that he had the impression that hard-liners,
led by Putin, were encircling Medvedev to limit his actions
and effectiveness. The Patriarch also described how he told
Medvedev in no uncertain terms that Saakashvili's removal or
resignation would solve absolutely zero problems between
&#x
000A;TBILISI 00001289 002 OF 002
Georgia and Russia.
TEFFT

The information recorded on this site has been extracted from http://Wikileaks.org (Georgia) database..

We wish to express our gratitude to Julian Assange and his team for making this data available as it is an important public record.

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:

The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.

The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.

The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.